Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every single head-to-head comparison in the database, taking all 17 recorded benchmark victories. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H does not win a single test in the dataset. This is not a close contest by any measure.

The largest gap appears in multi-core rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42,718 against 9,240 for the Ultra 7 255H, a delta of 362.3%. That is over four and a half times the raw score. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows a similar pattern, with the desktop part at 17,941 versus 6,381, a 181.2% advantage. Even the smallest delta, in Passmark single-thread tests, still favors the Ultra 5 250KF Plus by 8.8%, with scores of 4,698 against 4,317.

The data indicates that the Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the dominant choice for compute-heavy tasks such as 3D rendering, data compression, encryption, and mathematical workloads. Its wins in Passmark integer math (123,030 vs 77,975, up 57.8%) and floating-point math (159,824 vs 98,796, up 61.8%) confirm broad superiority across general processing tasks.

The Ultra 7 255H shows no area of measurable strength in this comparison. Even in the single-threaded Passmark tests, where mobile parts often close the gap, it remains behind by nearly 9%. The database records zero wins for the mobile chip, meaning there is no workload category in the measured data where it comes out ahead. Its closest relative performance appears in the Passmark physics test, where the deficit is 41.2%, still a substantial margin.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from the same Intel Core Ultra Series 2 family, but they target different market segments with different physical designs. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1851, while the Ultra 7 255H is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2049.

Both chips use the same 3 nm process node from TSMC. The desktop part carries the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, while the mobile chip uses Arrow Lake-H. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads, all physical, with no hyperthreading enabled. The Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads, also without hyperthreading. The desktop part has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The mobile part runs at 2.00 GHz base and 5.10 GHz boost.

Cache configurations differ notably. Both parts have 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 cache is 30 MB on the Ultra 5 250KF Plus versus 24 MB on the Ultra 7 255H. That 6 MB difference in last-level cache contributes to the desktop chip's performance headroom in multi-threaded workloads.

Memory support also diverges. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a theoretical bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Ultra 7 255H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a slightly lower bandwidth figure of 102.4 GB/s. Both processors support ECC memory.

The power envelope is a major differentiator. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a TDP of 125 W, while the Ultra 7 255H is rated at just 28 W. That 97 W gap directly explains much of the performance difference. The desktop chip can sustain far higher power draw, allowing its higher clocks and larger cache to operate at full capacity. The mobile chip is constrained by thermal and power limits typical of laptops.

PCI Express support is identical on paper: both use Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics, while the Ultra 7 255H includes Arc Graphics 140T. The desktop part has an unlocked multiplier, making it suitable for overclocking, whereas the mobile chip's multiplier is locked.

The Ultra 5 250KF Plus lists a launch MSRP of $184 and a release date of 2026-03-10. The Ultra 7 255H has no launch MSRP in the database and released earlier, on 2025-01-12. The desktop part uses 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the mobile chip's transistor count and die size are not recorded.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports only one conclusion for raw performance: the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the stronger processor in every measured category. It holds a 93rd percentile ranking among all CPUs, while the Ultra 7 255H sits at the 83rd percentile. The average benchmark score for the desktop part is 66,159, roughly double the mobile chip's 33,537.

The Ultra 5 250KF Plus also compares favorably to its nearest rivals in the database. It sits within 1% of the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D (delta 0.4%) and the Intel Core 9 273PQE (delta 0.1%). It trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by 1% and the AMD EPYC 4465P by 1.1%. These margins are tight, indicating the desktop part is competitive at the top of its class.

The Ultra 7 255H, by contrast, matches closely with mid-range mobile and desktop parts. It is statistically even with the AMD Ryzen 5 240 (delta 0%), trails the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS by 0.4%, and the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX by 0.4%, while leading the Intel Core i5-12600HX by 0.5%. Its performance class is entirely different from the Ultra 5 250KF Plus.

For users building a desktop system with power delivery and cooling to spare, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the clear choice based on these measurements. For a mobile platform where power consumption matters, the Ultra 7 255H delivers a 28 W TDP with integrated graphics, but it will not match the desktop part's throughput.

FAQ

Q: How many benchmarks does the Ultra 5 250KF Plus win?

A: The Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins all 17 head-to-head benchmark tests recorded in the database. The Ultra 7 255H wins zero.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest delta appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 42,718 versus 9,240 for the Ultra 7 255H, a 362.3% advantage.

Q: Do both processors use the same manufacturing process?

A: Yes, both are built on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The desktop part uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename, while the mobile part uses Arrow Lake-H.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 255H has 24 MB. Both have 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core.

Q: Does the Ultra 7 255H have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, it includes Arc Graphics 140T. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics, listed as N/A in the database.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Ultra 5 250KF Plus is rated at 125 W TDP. The Ultra 7 255H is rated at 28 W TDP.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive results come from Cinebench. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus delivers 42,718 points against 9,240 for the Ultra 7 255H, a 362.3% lead. The single-core version of that test shows 6,030 versus 1,843, a 227.2% gap. Cinebench R20 multi-core follows with 17,941 versus 6,381 (181.2%), and single-core with 2,532 versus 900 (181.3%). Cinebench R15 multi-core records 4,305 versus 1,515 (184.2%), and single-core 607 versus 251 (141.8%).

Passmark results paint the same story across different workload types. Data compression shows 553,155 for the desktop part versus 298,850 for the mobile part, an 85.1% advantage. Data encryption scores 41,292 versus 23,395, up 76.5%. Extended instructions run at 42,880 versus 23,755, a 80.5% lead. Prime number finding shows 452 versus 303, a 49.2% difference.

Floating-point math favors the Ultra 5 250KF Plus at 159,824 versus 98,796, a 61.8% margin. Integer math follows at 123,030 versus 77,975, up 57.8%. The Passmark multithread score is 50,146 versus 30,703, a 63.3% lead. Physics tests show 3,183 versus 2,254, up 41.2%. Random string sorting delivers 67,209 versus 36,058, an 86.4% improvement.

The closest contest in the entire dataset is the Passmark single-thread test. Here, the Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4,698 against 4,317 for the Ultra 7 255H, a modest but still decisive 8.8% advantage. This result shows that even in the most lightly threaded workloads, the desktop part maintains a lead, though a far smaller one than in heavily threaded tests.

The average benchmark score confirms the overall hierarchy. The Ultra 5 250KF Plus averages 66,159 across all tests, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 7 255H averages 33,537, good for the 83rd percentile. The desktop part's nearest rival is the Intel Core 9 273PQE at 66,099 (delta 0.1%), while the mobile part's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 240 at 33,542 (delta 0%). These context figures show that the Ultra 5 250KF Plus competes at the high end of the desktop spectrum, while the Ultra 7 255H sits firmly in the mobile mainstream.